Atomic Dilemma

Should the U.S. freely sell peaceful nuclear technology abroad? The question is so important that it is being more and more debated at the highest levels of the Federal Government. On the one hand, the nation's overseas sales of atomic power plants, equipment and services swell U.S. export earnings by a cool $1.5 billion a year. On the other, the proliferation of nuclear reactors can also lead to the spread of nuclear weapons--meaning atom bombs.

Last week the federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission opened the debate to the public for the first time. Its concern was anything but academic, since it has to decide whether to approve a license to export 12,261 kg. of Government-owned enriched uranium to fuel a reactor in India. In 1974 Indian scientists used fissionable materials, taken from a Canadian reactor, to build what they called a "peaceful nuclear device." After the bomb was exploded, Canada shut off nuclear aid to India. To keep the U.S. from following suit, the Indian government pledged to use American materials exclusively in its civilian reactors. The Natural Resources Defense Council, a U.S. environmental-law group, worried nonetheless about India's capacity to create more A-bombs and asked the NRC to stop the uranium sale. In response, the NRC's commissioners decided to hold two days of hearings in Washington.

The debate was often blunt. Herbert Scoville Jr., a former assistant director of the federal Arms Control and Disarmament Agency, testified: "To continue to guarantee the supply of nuclear fuel to a nation that has demonstrated its intention to acquire nuclear weapons is to send the wrong signal to the rest of the world." He and other opponents of the sale want the U.S. to use enriched uranium--the nation is still the world's largest supplier--to demand concessions. As one condition of sale, for example, India might be required to sign the nonproliferation treaty of 1968.

Reliable Supplier. Unfortunately, the issue is not so simple, said Myron B. Kratzer, a Deputy Assistant Secretary of State. If the U.S. withholds the uranium, India could buy fuel elsewhere--probably from the U.S.S.R. The Indians might then also refuse to allow international inspectors to monitor their reactors. That would remove the only existing outside control over India's nuclear activities. Therefore, Kratzer continued, the U.S.'s best position involves a paradox. The nation can watch over the proliferation of atomic weapons only if it remains actively engaged as a reliable supplier of peaceful nuclear needs.

Aggressive Competitors. Commercial pressures complicate the situation even further. Right now, 45 nations have announced plans to build 257 nuclear power plants in order to reduce their dependence on Middle Eastern oil. At the same time, the U.S.'s share of an expanding world nuclear market has fallen from 85% in 1972 to 40% today. Federal policymakers' concerns about proliferation problems have not helped. While U.S. agencies have held up American companies' reactor sales abroad, other competitors have moved aggressively. Just last June, a French consortium won a $1 billion contract to build two reactors in South Africa'. West Germany earlier this year captured a $5 billion nuclear job in Brazil and another worth $7 billion in Iran. Between now and 2000, some experts predict, nuclear contracts worth a staggering $120 billion will be up for grabs.

India's case thus points up the confusions in the U.S.'s nuclear policy, confusions that the NRC cannot resolve alone. The commission will probably approve the uranium sale--on the condition that India sends the fuel's "ashes" back to the U.S. after it has been used. That would remove the temptation to transmute the spent uranium into bomb-quality material. But it would also have the unpleasant effect of making the U.S. responsible for India's radioactive wastes. Nor would such a decision establish the guidelines that are sorely needed on which nations, and under what circumstances, the U.S. and its companies should sell reactors and fuel.

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so viewer discretion is required.